CI custom builds do not seem up to date

[BridgeAR]

Two CI runs showed failing custom builds (https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/22625/ and https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/22644/). The failures both seem to miss some code changes even though the commit points to the correct hash. I am a bit puzzled about these failures.

PTAL

[refack]

My best guess is it comes from the rebasing procedure. I've added git log -3 to the job so it will be possible to verify what is actually checked out.

[BridgeAR]

It seems like there is no rebase going on for this specific CI job.

See the difference here:

https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-commit-custom-suites-freestyle/6461/consoleFull
https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-commit-linuxone/12806/nodes=rhel72-s390x/consoleFull

[rvagg]

Is there an active build contributor who is willing to maintain these "customsuites" builds? Seems like they are causing problems and active folks don't want to take responsibility for them.

[richardlau]

Looking at the job config:

it's trying to execute ./build/master/jenkins/scripts/node-test-commit-pre.sh. I think this should be ./build/jenkins/scripts/node-test-commit-pre.sh. And it probably shouldn't be using -s (as nothing is being piped into it).

The equivalent in the other jobs, e.g. https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-commit-linux/configure, looks like this:

curl https://raw.githubusercontent.com/nodejs/build/master/jenkins/scripts/node-test-commit-pre.sh | bash -ex -s before

we should change https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-commit-custom-suites-freestyle/configure to be consistent with the other jobs in the way it executes that script and see if it fixes this issue (the script does the rebasing).

(If @nodejs/build are okay with giving me permission to edit the job I'd be more than happy to do the edits myself.)

[Trott]

Making the change suggested by @richardlau (pointing it at the right script and getting rid of the -s stuff) seems to have fixed things. Closing, but re-open if I'm being too hasty about that.

Also, +1 to giving @richardlau access to the Jenkins configs for this stuff.

[richardlau]

Also, +1 to giving @richardlau access to the Jenkins configs for this stuff.

Thanks @Trott. I'll raise a separate issue about access/joining the WG so it can be properly discussed/tracked.